About six weeks ago, early March 2024, I talked to someone who was supposedly connected to the Kansas City Chiefs inner circle. They said the Chiefs were not tied to KC and were definitely seeking options outside the city.
The reason “The Fans Spoke”
My reply was “Good riddance! The Chiefs think that, then they must be stupid!”
Why? Because the Chiefs are playing games, are giving mixed signals, and threatening the fans and taxpayers. The Royals did that and ended up getting a NO vote. Of course, the Royals had multiple other reasons for a NO vote, with their sketchy back-and-forth only being one part of it.
…Continued Below…
NOTE: Why the Royals’ April 2024 vote failed…
- Sketch last-minute changes
(We were told about a NKC & an East Village option) - Kansas City loves the K!!!
- Fans and the City are upset that Sherman does not respect the Kaufman family and legacy. The city feels Sherman has not earned his own legacy yet.
- The City/County/State has developed a nice stadium that the fans love. They feel that the Shermans are irresponsible with the money they have been given to maintain the K. Citizens/Taxpayers feel that the funds were squandered to encourage building a new stadium as Sherman’s “PET PROJECT!!!”
- The ’24 proposal destroys a neighborhood!
- Already, grassroots redeveloped
- Multiple businesses told us we don’t care about you
- Tons of extra money spent to buy out property owners
(Sketch with most proposed locations) - New building still under tax breaks
- No compassion for the art district/arts
You alienated three groups of people: Lovers of the K, Art lovers & business owners, and fiscally responsible people
Back to the Chiefs
The person told me that “The citizens ‘spoke’ [Voted NO] and didn’t want to pay for the Chiefs’ stadium.” To which I countered. “Um, NO, the citizens voted NO to the Royals plan:”
- We don’t want to pay for a baseball stadium downtown
- We don’t want to leave Kauffman
- We don’t… (See the above list)
“IF the Chiefs had kept to the original plan they requested, the Chiefs’ vote would have been a YES”
What was this Chiefs’ request? A 20-year plan with upgrades to Arrowhead. We, the citizens, are willing to make Arrowhead amenities world-class. Yes, Locker rooms et al.
Instead, the Chiefs were attached to a 40-year plan with double the funds. They didn’t request a new stadium, but rather a bunch of pet projects due to double the funds. THESE PET PROJECTS were not included in the Chiefs’ requests from April/July 2023 to December 2023. Instead, the pet projects were added when they got attached to the high dollar Royals’ plan.
The problem is, in 20 years, halfway through the 40-year tax, we would still be paying for these pet projects. A 20-year tax lets us reassess needs and build the Chiefs a new stadium if needed in 20 years.
Instead, the April 2024 tax, while not a higher [“new”] tax, it is a NEW 40-year tax for the same assessment. Being both long and not covering a new Arrowhead, it would lead to a new tax not only on Arrowhead in 20 years, but most likely a new tax on new upgrades to the new 2029 Royals stadium in 20 years.
Changing plans/Scatter Brained requests
Now that the initial commingled Royals vote was rejected, the Chiefs are getting greedy. Their new proposals are now putting forth both all the pet projects they added last minute to the Royals vote, but also a new stadium.
The fans LOVE Arrowhead just like they love the K, and it seems the Chiefs do too, as they initially only requested upgrades.
Not only is it a great stadium that’s built well, but rebuilding may mean we will lose our status as the Loudest stadium in the NFL, as league leadership may require sound-dampening acoustics in a new stadium.
Thus, looking at the Royals proposal, while not a “New [second/increased tax]” today, the tax proposal of April 2024 will result in one down the road due to its length and lack of maintenance provisions.
i.e., instead of including 40 years of maintenance, it included pet projects today
I am still only quoting the Royal proposal because the Chiefs have not put forth a [reasonable] plan since their 2023 proposal, and subsequent commingled royal plan/vote. Instead, they are playing voters/fans against each other, having governments bid against each other for the worst plan that fans might get.
Worst??? Yes, the highest priced replacement for Arrowhead with taxpayer and fan dollars. Not only will taxpayers be on the hook, but fans will have to pay higher prices to cover these NEW TAXES.
Finally, when the Chiefs were called out for these missteps, they threatened the citizens with moving rather than making a proper request.
Conclusion
- The Chiefs made a 180 request at the last minute vs the previous proposal of April(?) July(?) to December 2023 request.
- They attached to a poor plan/the Royals vote
- The Chiefs added pet projects when they joined the Royal Plan
- The 40-year plan vs the 20-year one didn’t include maintenance plans
- They disenfranchised fans and voters by claiming those groups didn’t want the Chiefs after voting no on the joint Royals plan.
- Extreme disenfranchisement and hostage holding: Not only did they claim the fans and voters didn’t want to play ball, they further disenfranchised the groups by threatening to move not only out of the city, county, and state, but even out of the Kansas City Metro Area.
- They are getting greedy: Having fans and governments outbid each other puts taxpayers on the hook for a fancy stadium that fans, taxpayers, nor the Chiefs asked for. Depending on the proposal, the taxpayers will pay outright, and on others, the fans will pay more to cover STAR taxes that will probably be paid for from the taxpayers’ general funds when costs aren’t fully funded from the STAR portions.